Friday, January 21, 2011

Wonderful Speech of Bishop Athanasius Schneider on Vatican II

THE CHALLENGE OF OPPOSING INTERPRETATIONSby Athanasius Schneider

[. . .] For a correct interpretation of Vatican Council II, it is necessary to keep in mind theintention manifested in the conciliar documents themselves and in the specific words of thepopes who convened and presided over it, John XXIII and Paul VI.Moreover, it is necessary to discover the common thread of the entire work of the Council,meaning its pastoral intention, which is the "salus animarum," the salvation of souls. This, inturn, depends on and is subordinate to the promotion of divine worship and of the glory ofGod, it depends on the primacy of God.This primacy of God in life and in all the activity of the Church is manifested unequivocally bythe fact that the constitution on the liturgy occupies, conceptually and chronologically, the firstplace in the vast work of the Council. [. . .]*The characteristic of the rupture in the interpretation of the conciliar texts is manifested in amore stereotypical and widespread way in the thesis of an anthropocentric, secularist, ornaturalistic shift of Vatican Council II with respect to the previous ecclesial tradition.One of the best-known manifestations of such a mistaken interpretation has been, forexample, so-called liberation theology and the subsequent devastating pastoral practice.What contrast there is between this liberation theology and its practice and the Councilappears evident from the following conciliar teaching: "Christ, to be sure, gave His Church noproper mission in the political, economic or social order. The purpose which He set before heris a religious one" (cf. "Gaudium et Spes," 42). [. . .]One interpretation of rupture of lighter doctrinal weight has been manifested in the pastoralliturgical field. One might mention in this regard the decline of the sacred and sublimecharacter of the liturgy, and the introduction of more anthropocentric elements of expression.This phenomenon can be seen in three liturgical practices that are fairly well known andwidespread in almost all the parishes of the Catholic sphere: the almost completedisappearance of the use of the Latin language, the reception of the Eucharistic body ofChrist directly in the hand while standing, and the celebration of the Eucharistic sacrifice inthe modality of a closed circle in which priest and people are constantly looking at each other.This way of praying – without everyone facing the same direction, which is a more naturalcorporal and symbolic expression with respect to the truth of everyone being oriented towardGod in public worship – contradicts the practice that Jesus himself and his apostles observedin public prayer, both in the temple and in the synagogue. It also contradicts the unanimoustestimony of the Fathers and of all the subsequent tradition of the Eastern and WesternChurch.These three pastoral and liturgical practices glaringly at odds with the law of prayermaintained by generations of the Catholic faithful for at least one millennium find no support inthe conciliar texts, and even contradict both a specific text of the Council (on the Latinlanguage: cf. "Sacrosanctum Concilium," 36 and 54) and the "mens," the true intention of theconciliar Fathers, as can be seen in the proceedings of the Council.*In the hermeneutical uproar of the contrasting interpretations, and in the confusion of pastoraland liturgical applications, what appears as the only authentic interpreter of the conciliar textsis the Council itself, together with the pope.One could make a comparison with the confused hermeneutical climate of the first centuriesof the Church, caused by arbitrary biblical and doctrinal interpretations on the part ofheterodox groups. In his famous work "De Praescriptione Haereticorum," Tertullian was ableto counter the heretics of various tendencies with the fact that only the Church possesses the"praescriptio," meaning only the Church is the legitimate proprietor of the faith, of the word ofGod and of the tradition. The Church can use this to fend off the heretics in disputes over trueinterpretation. Only the Church can say, according to Tertullian, "Ego sum heresApostolorum," I am the heir of the apostles. By way of analogy, only the supreme magisteriumof the pope or of a future ecumenical council will be able to say: "Ego sum heres ConciliiVaticani II."In recent decades there existed, and still exist today, groupings within the Church that areperpetrating an enormous abuse of the pastoral character of the Council and its texts, writtenaccording to this pastoral intention, since the Council did not want to present its own definitiveor unalterable teachings. From the same pastoral nature of the texts of the Council, it can beseen that its texts are in principle open to supplementation and to further doctrinalclarifications. Keeping in mind the now decades-long experience of interpretations that aredoctrinally and pastorally mistaken and contrary to the bimillennial continuity of the doctrineand prayer of the faith, there thus arises the necessity and urgency of a specific andauthoritative intervention of the pontifical magisterium for an authentic interpretation of theconciliar texts, with supplementation and doctrinal clarifications; a sort of "Syllabus" of theerrors in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.There is the need for a new Syllabus, this time directed not so much against the errorscoming from outside of the Church, but against the errors circulated within the Church bysupporters of the thesis of discontinuity and rupture, with its doctrinal, liturgical, and pastoralapplication.Such a Syllabus should consist of two parts: the part that points out the errors, and thepositive part with proposals for clarification, completion, and doctrinal clarification. *Two groupings stand out for their support of the theory of rupture. One of these groupingstries to "Protestantize" the life of the Church doctrinally, liturgically, and pastorally. On theopposite side are those traditional groups which, in the name of tradition, reject the Counciland exempt themselves from submission to the supreme living magisterium of the Church,from the visible head of the Church, the vicar of Christ on earth, submitting meanwhile only tothe invisible head of the Church, waiting for better times. [. . .]In essence, there have been two impediments preventing the true intention of the Council andits magisterium from bearing abundant and lasting fruit.One was found outside of the Church, in the violent process of cultural and social revolutionduring the 1960's, which like every powerful social phenomenon penetrated inside theChurch, infecting with its spirit of rupture vast segments of persons and institutions.The other impediment was manifested in the lack of wise and at the same time intrepidpastors of the Church who might be quick to defend the purity and integrity of the faith and ofliturgical and pastoral life, not allowing themselves to be influenced by flattery or fear.The Council of Trent had already affirmed in one of its last decrees on the general reform ofthe Church: "The holy synod, shaken by the many extremely serious evils that afflict theChurch, cannot do other than recall that the thing most necessary for the Church of God is toselect excellent and suitable pastors; all the more in that our Lord Jesus Christ will ask for anaccount of the blood of those sheep that should perish because of the bad governance ofnegligent pastors unmindful of their duty" (Session XXIV, Decree "de reformatione," can. 1).The Council continued: "As for all those who for any reason have been authorized by the HolySee to intervene in the promotion of future prelates or those who take part in this in anotherway, the holy Council exhorts and admonishes them to remember above all that they can donothing more useful for the glory of God and the salvation of the people than to devotethemselves to choosing good and suitable pastors to govern the Church."So there is truly a need for a Syllabus on the Council with doctrinal value, and moreover thereis a need for an increase in the number of holy, courageous pastors deeply rooted in thetradition of the Church, free from any sort of mentality of rupture, both in the doctrinal field andin the liturgical field.These two elements constitute the indispensable condition so that doctrinal, liturgical, andpastoral confusion may diminish significantly, and so that the pastoral work of Vatican CouncilII may bear much lasting fruit in the spirit of the tradition, which connects us to the spirit thathas reigned in every time, everywhere and in all true children of the Catholic Church, which isthe only and the true Church of God on earth.

People who Follow this Blog

Our Lady of the Clergy, Pray for Us!

O Priest! thou art not thyself, because thou art God; thou art not of thyself, because thou art the servant and minister of Christ; thou art not thine own, because thou art the spouse of the Church; thou art not for thyself, because thou art the mediator between God and man; thou art not from thyself, because thou art nothing. What then art thou, O Priest? Nothing and everything. O Priest! take care lest what was said to Christ on the Cross be said to thee: He saved others, himself he cannot save. -St. Norbert